Alexander The Great Research Paper

Alexander slaughtered many people. According to Doc C, Alexander had lost many men trying to get into Tyre. When Alexander got into Tyre, he had ordered

Many people fail to realize that Alexander has had a definite affect on us today, although not as great as he would have had on people of the past. In most parts the world today, Alexander The Great is considered a legend; however, in some places, Alexander is considered a god. One of the most notable people in history, Alexander has reached an iconic status in our world today. He possibly may have even been referred to in the Quran (Surah 18:89-98). There are still many stories told about him including folktales, and movies. In modern Iran, Alexander is still known as an evil king who nearly destroyed the ancient Persian culture and religion. Although the effect of “Alexander Mania” has died down since the time of his reign, you can still see the mark that he has left on today’s world.

Alexander went to Corinth for the assembly of the Greek league and was named the supreme commander of all Greece. At that time the Thebans’ revolted; he destroyed everything in their city except the temples. This served as a reminder to the other communities and tribes in Macedonia respected and honored Alexander. He proceeded to conquer the Asia Minor, and used his knowledge to plan and organize the army. During the Persian expedition Alexander had in his army more than 100 000 but only a few fought. Alexander honored veterans; he left them in charge of cities. He was a military genius and could change his army within seconds and used to make decisions as fast as possible. He could even change his plan of action if the enemy changed plans. To him it was not about numbers but leadership and plan in battle. The first commander to have backup reserves was Alexander; this affected the way wars were staged and fought in the coming years. Alexander defeated the Persians; he was an unwavering fighter and fought with his soldiers. He conquered the Phoenician coast, Syria and Egypt (Louis, W. R, 1984).

After crossing the Hellespont with an army of 35,000 men, he met his first Persian battle on the banks of the Granicus River. His cavalry charged across the Granicus and overwhelmed the Persians. From there, Alexander went on to conquer all of Asia Minor with little resistance (“Alexander the Great.'; 2). After recovering from a serious illness in 333 B.C., Alexander marched to Syria, where the king of Persia, Darius III, had fortified a riverbank near Issus with 600,000 men (Durant 544). Again Alexander attacked with his cavalry and defeated the Persians. Darius III managed to escape but left behind his family and a large amount of money.

Later on in his life, Alexander continued to show his ability to accomplish many difficult tasks. "After three grueling years of warfare and three decisive battles, Alexander smashed the Persian armies at the Tigris River and conquered the mighty Persian Empire, including the legendary city of Babylon" (“Alexander the Great” ushistory.org). This was a great victory that proved Alexander had what it took to be a great leader. Defeating the Persians was something many leaders could never do, but Alexander

In 356 B.C.E., a boy named Alexander was born. He grew up to be a great child, with his dad being the king of Macedonia,but, when Alexander was very young, his father had been assassinated so he had to inherit the power (BGE) . By that time, his father had taken over Greece and was planning on going east to conquer Persia, which Alexander had taken over as the new king. After many rough wars, Alexander had finally taken over Persia, and was known as Alexander the Great (BGE, Doc A). Even after Alexander had taken over Persia, he kept pushing all the way east until his army had to tell him to stop. So, was Alexander as excellent as people say? Alexander was excellent because he had leadership, courage, and had many remarkable achievements over his time. By these measures, Alexander was great because of his military strategies, his strive to spread Greek culture,

In document C it states “In the end, however, the causeway was completed and Alexander’s army smashed into the city.”, this is saying that even if the fight was 7 months he would never quit (Doc C). While on the move back to Greece Alexander’s followers wanted to quit and didn’t want to go on, so some stayed behind while he went on and “conquered the world” (Doc F). “At the time, Persia was probably the most powerful kingdom in the world. This mattered little to Alexander. Using his disciplined cavalry and infantry in both ways, Alexander fought his way through lands controlled by Persia - across Asia Minor, down the Mediterranean coast, into Egypt, and then to Mesopotamia. There he defeated a huge Persian army at Gaugamela.” (BGE). This quote is saying that even though Persia may be strong and powerful Alexander would still get his way wherever he went. This evidence helps explain why Alexander was great because when going through the difficult parts of his battles he would always stay strong and brave through it all despite the hard

Only a small number of people in the world have ever earned the title, "Great". Alexander III of Macedonia is one of lucky few. Alexander the Great started his reign in Macedonia at the age of twenty after his father was assassinated. He then proceeded to expand his kingdom to the largest in the world. So, just how great was he? Alexander the Great was an undeniably brilliant military strategist, yet you could still argue that he doesn't deserve his title because of his cruel treatment of his conquered people and massive ego. This paper will cover his greatness, not-so-greatness, and why he can be a little bit of both.

I think Alexander deserves the title of Alexander the Great. He was 20 years old when he launched his invasion into the Persian Empire. The evidence I will use are these documents. The legend of the helmet, document D. The battle of Porus, document B. Alexander's empire compared to the Roman Empire, document A, E. I think Alexander was great, because of the size his empire and how little time it took him to make.

Alexander the Great was a king and conqueror. He is commonly referred to as “the most powerful leader of all time.” What is it that makes him such a powerful leader? What has he accomplished that has made him so significant? Were his accomplishments positive or negative? These are all questions that when combined as one create a debate that has been going on for decades. There are those who admire Alexander’s military achievements and ability to carve out the largest empire the world has seen. Then there are those who perceive him as a selfish, cruel madman with drinking problems. This paper will outline the different sides taken on Alexander and the question as to what his significance/influence was and whether it

During the course of his life and reign, Alexander had fought and won many battles and wars, defeating many kings and warlords throughout the ancient world. Perhaps his most recognized conquest was of the Achaemenid Empire of Persia and its ‘King of Kings’ Darius III during the Battle of Issus 1. After defeating the Persians at the Battle

Alexander the Great is remembered as a conquering man who built one of the largest empires. Some describe him as a man with a vision of world harmony. Others see him as a blood thirsty man with a mental illness. One thing that cannot be argued is that he and his empire are fascinating studies. From his rise to power to his mysterious death is interesting, but even after he died the story is fascinating. Due to his death, his empire was divided and a long power-struggle began starting with his generals. Each account has its own story of war and betrayal. These days must have been hard for those in power; they never knew who they could trust. Only the ones who were skilled in the strategy of war and ruthless enough to maintain their power

The death of Alexander the Great in 323 BC marks the beginning of the Hellenistic Period and covers 300 years to the invasion of Egypt by the Romans. The word Hellenic refers only to the Greeks, but the term Hellenistic refers to `the Greek-influenced societies that arose in the wake of Alexander's conquest' (Sacks, 105). The Hellenistic world extended from Greece all the way to Afghanistan and resulted in the beginning of the mass spreading of Greek culture. Its central characteristics were the mass empires created by Alexander and his successors, the mingling of Greek and other cultures and the diffusion of religions

Alexander grew up to conquer the world regardless the cost. Alexander’s military successes was beyond believe, because he conquered Asian minor and Egypt in a decade. The size of the army led by Alexander it vary in different books but according to Arrian (Ptolemy) , there was 32,000 infantry and 5100 cavalry, agree by Diodorus (17.17)(page 34). Even though with this small army Alexander the Great smashed the Persian with less difficulty. ”Alexander, therefore, while the enemy’s attention was engaged by the siege engines and the attempted assault within their sector , order the Guards, the archer, the Agrianes, and his personal guard to hold themselves in readiness, and himself, with a few men only, crept unobserved by the dried-up water-course, under the wall, into the town. Once inside he broke open the nearest gates and admitted the rest of the troops without difficulty” (Page 204). First, Alexander order to his siege engine was to build batter defense and force an entrance through the breaches, soon something has changed his tactics. There were a stream, under the bed, Alexander soldiers pass under the town and opened the gate. While the Cyropolis were engaged in the front. Alexander the great took the town and killed about 8,000, the rest surrounded. Alexander brought down the greatest empire in the world at that period, without difficulty and most

Alexander III of Macedon, widely known as Alexander the Great, is opinioned by some people to have been a ruthless man who only had a thirst for conquest , but according to others he was a man of intellect and “statesmanlike vision” (Hammond Preface). In N.G.L. Hammond’s book The Genius of Alexander the Great, as stated in the preface, he tries to refrain from writing based on his own opinion of Alexander, and instead analyzes the few surviving narratives on Alexander’s achievements in an unbiased manner. He portrays the conquests, struggles, and greatest achievements of Alexander’s career, such as the building of his empire that stretched from the eastern Mediterranean coast through Asia Minor and the